Insecure Security Clearances

Progressives, including the mainstream media, are apoplectic because President Trump rescinded former CIA director John Brennan’s top secret security clearance. The president is currently in the process of deciding whether or not other disgraced members of the Obama administration (James Clapper, James Comey, Susan Rice, Michael Hayden, Andrew McCabe, Bruce Ohr) deserve to have their clearances pulled as well. (Hell, yes!)

Progressives ridiculously cry out that removing top secret clearance from former Obama officials violates their First Amendment rights, although nobody is stopping any of them from speaking.

Quite obviously, having top secret clearance is a privilege bestowed constitutionally by the president; it’s not a constitutional right in and of itself.

Others claim that somehow, by removing Brennan’s security clearance, the president is obstructing justice, when it’s far more likely that President Trump is pursuing long-overdue justice.

Others claim that the president is retaliating against his critics although, to borrow a line from most mainstream media critics of the president’s, they make these allegations without offering any evidence whatsoever.

(Search on the phrase, “the president claimed without evidence” and see what comes up, and how often.)

Still others claim that the president is trying to “punish” or “intimidate” those who criticize him; again, they offer no evidence.

(Why shouldn’t we hold the media to the same standard they set for President Trump? Where’s the evidence that the president’s motives are anything other than what his spokesperson has stated? If the president has to provide “evidence” for his opinions, policy judgments, or reasoning, then why don’t the media have to do the same, when they speculate about the president’s motives or allow others to spew political opinion disguised as fact?)

Pulling Brennan’s clearance is without precedent, progressives howl, even though Obama removed the security clearance of a whistle blower who was apparently onto some of the shady goings-on in the Obama administration. This happened right about the time that the anti-Trump insurance policy was going into effect. The questions the whistle blower asked directly concerned someone potentially being paid to spy on “use … tradecraft” against Trump’s campaign.

By tradition, former intelligence officers are allowed to retain their security clearances for a time (e.g., Bush officials retained them for “at least a year,” which implies that at some point Obama pulled them).

This tradition exists only so that incoming officials can tap the expertise of former officials; it’s not for the benefit of the former officials themselves.

However, it’s distinctly unlikely that Trump officials would ask anything of John Brennan (or trust anything he says at this point, all things considered).

Indeed, there’s a special caveat in the tradition, just for John Brennan: [emphasis added to quotes]

In the case of former CIA directors, the agency “holds” their security clearance and renews it every five years for the rest of their lives. However, that requires former CIA directors to behave like current CIA employees if they want to keep their clearance, which means avoiding travel to certain countries and generally living in a manner above reproach.

Which means, by any reasonable standard, that former CIA directors ought to refrain from publicly accusing the President of the United States of treason and also ought to refrain from openly joining, if not leading, an organized “resistance” against the new president’s administration!

Ever since President Trump took office, the mainstream media has written story after story (90% of them negative) criticizing the president and breathlessly touting the Clinton/Obama/Deep State nonsense that Trump “colluded” with Russia, to help the evil Russians interfere in the 2016 election and work against Hillary Clinton.

Most of these stories cite always-anonymous “former officials” from the Obama administration. These would be members of Obama’s shadow government. Or is it their secret society?

These former officials would also be political enemies of President Trump, who are always willing to back up each other’s stories, thus providing the complicit media with the required number of sources who, of course, say the same thing, in lockstep, by design, because they collude, plan, and conspire to do so (not unlike members of the Democrat Party).

Anonymous “former officials” leaking to the media, alleging that they know without a doubt that President Trump colluded with Russians, is in and of itself reason enough to pull their clearances.

When these people speak publicly, because they do have security clearances at the highest level, that alone lends credibility to their claims, even if the claims are simply politically motivated lies, told perhaps even to help save their own behinds. As Sarah Sanders said,

Making baseless accusations of improper contact with Russia or being influenced by Russia against the president is extremely inappropriate. And the fact that people with security clearances are making these baseless charges provides inappropriate legitimacy to accusations with zero evidence.

Some who applaud President Trump’s move cite the fact that former officials with security clearances are able to use that status to line their own pockets. Brennan’s supporters claim that’s not something he would do. Of course not, he’s a patriot! Besides, isn’t he pro-communism and so anti-capitalism? Yet one person who knows Brennan has this to say,

Brennan and the others have cashed in on their government service. They’ve all become rich by sitting on corporate boards. Brennan is on the board of directors of a company called SecureAuth + CORE Security. He also serves on the board of The Analysis Corporation, which he helped found before joining the Obama Administration. Finally, and most importantly, Brennan is now the official talking head and “Intelligence Consultant” for NBC News and MSNBC.

That same writer provides yet more excellent reasons why former officials should not retain top secret security clearances:

This has abuse written all over it. First, these officials run the risk of exposing classified information in a television interview, either inadvertently or not. Second, and more cynically, what is to keep them from propagandizing the American people by simply spouting the CIA line or allowing the CIA to use them to put out disinformation? What’s to keep them from propagandizing the American people by selectively leaking information known only to the intelligence agencies and Congress? Or to release information passed to them by the FBI?

Propagandizing the American people for political reasons, putting out disinformation, for revenge because their chosen one was not elected, or out of a desire to save their own behinds from much-needed justice, may be exactly why so many “former officials” from Obama’s administration are openly or anonymously speaking out against President Trump.

And who is there who can put the lie to their lies? Current officials must follow protocol. They can’t join the fray. It would be unseemly and damaging to the country and to our national security. They can’t discuss classified information, even to refute harmful lies.

There’s another good reason to pull the security clearances of all these former Obama officials: It’s doubtless a crime for anyone who is a current member of our government to share classified information with anyone who doesn’t have the appropriate security clearance, especially if they’re sharing with a former Obama administration official who has very publicly had his or her clearance pulled.

In fact, it’s important to very publicly pull these clearances, to put potential leakers on notice. Pulling the security clearances of these politicized former officials will plug a big leaky hole that has been damaging to the administration and, by extension, to all of the country.

Holdovers from the Obama administration as well as Clinton aficionados, never-Trumpers, and progressives who work in our government may actually stop abusing their positions and will stop leaking or sharing information with those who leak to the media, because these leaks are damaging to our national security, not to mention to the national psyche.

Peter Strzok was fired this past week. Other Obama administration holdovers, other career government employees who are Clinton/Obama supporters, may think more than twice about sharing inside information with any of Obama’s mendacious former officials, lest these employees end up like Peter Strzok (fired).

Career government employees do very well for themselves. They have good benefits, relatively high salaries, great health care, and excellent pensions. All of the above will be placed at risk if they illegally share classified information with the likes of Brennan, Clapper, Comey, Hayden, Rice, Ohr, Yates, Strzok, or McCabe, or anyone else who has been suspected of colluding with or leaking to the mainstream media, to the detriment of our country.

Shutting down these anonymous media sources is long overdue.

Way to go, Senator Rand Paul, who was instrumental in asking for a review of these clearances.

Thank you, President Trump.

MAGA! And keep draining that Swamp.


130 responses to “Insecure Security Clearances


    “Barack Obama traveled to South Africa in July and delivered a speech at the 2018 Nelson Mandela Annual Lecture in Johannesburg.

    During the speech Obama called for guaranteed income.

    Obama also praised South African President Cyril Ramaphosa for quote, “Inspiring great hope in this country.” …

    On Monday the South African government began seizing white-owned farms without compensation. …”

    Yep. Great hope and change for somebody. Just not “whites.” Sounds like a plan, doesn’t it?

  2. FYI:

    Fellowship of the Minds publishing at that link for the time being. I haven’t read their stuff yet, so don’t know if this is permanent or will change.

  3. …so .. WHO GIVE … a F…. He’s Work-in’ – IT … GO AWAY!

    Women more likely 2 believe Omarosa than men, says Hill.TV poll ???

    I SAY NOT SO !!! So were EVEN !!!!

  4. Donald J. TrumpVerified account
    45th President of the United States of America

    • Been thinking about this as an analogy: Suppose someone or some group/cabal had a monopoly on paper and/or ink used to print newspapers or books. Suppose in the past, when everyone depended upon the printed word, thinking about Thomas Paine here, too–suppose the cabal that had a monopoly on paper and ink decided that they would NOT SELL paper and/ or ink to anyone with whom they politically disagreed, in order to deliberately stifle their ability to exercise their rights of free speech and freedom of the press. Would that seem to be unconstitutional? I would think so. The social media companies are seemingly acting in concert, at the behest of one political party or people who share one point of view, in order to deliberately, in a conspiratorial manner, stifle the communications of half the country. BECAUSE THEY CAN. Should they be allowed to?

  5. He said the “Drive-Bys” back then were Infuriated O V E R .. Brennan’s “incompetence.”

    Limbaugh said everyone in Washington wants a security clearance & then wants to keep it when they Leave their government job.

    “It’s how they set themselves Apart from other Members of the Swamp Club.”



    …. as ERDOGAN’s playing “HARD-BALL’S” <<< ha really?
    'A real NATO ally wouldn't have arrested Brunson in the 1st place'


    • Yeah. The “little ones.” NOT a “pedophilia” problem, but a homosexual problem. Pubescent young males and priests. Pre-teens and teens. Pedophilia involves pre-pubescent CHILDREN (<13). What is the age of consent in all the states where this abuse allegedly occurred? In Pennsylvania, it's 16. That's not to say that there are NOT cases of actual abuse. Will these cases be prosecuted? A grand jury made the report, so one assumes there will be 1000s of indictments. Right? The complete irony here is that it's a homosexual problem and the homosexual activists (who deny the fact of it being a homosexual problem) are trying, because of their agenda, to destroy the Catholic Church because of its stance on homosexuality! Not a biased report against Catholics? Then why did the grand jury NOT address similar abuse in other churches, religions, or even secular organizations? All of these thousands of instances come from records of the church which involve allegations. Did the grand jury examine, cross-examine, even question or call the victims, or are all these reports simply allegations, stories told or alleged, with no due process whatsoever?

  7. Communist Spy John Brennan Pulls an Obama, Claims to Have Learned About Dirty Dossier Used to Frame Trump from the Press

    Judicial Watch Sues Defense Department on Behalf of Whistleblower Adam Lovinger Who Lost Security Clearance after Raising Questions about Prominent Trump Spygate Figure

    President Trump Wants to Know Why Bruce Ohr, ‘Whose Family Received Big Money for Helping Create the Phony, Dirty and Discredited Dossier,’ Hasn’t Been Fired Yet by Jeff Session’s ‘Justice’ Department

    President Trump: Border Patrol Stops 10 Terrorists a Day From Entering U.S
    Judicial Watch’s Tom Fitton: DOJ is Attacking the Presidency through the Mueller Operation [VIDEO]
    Enemy of the People Update: Treasonous Washington Post Roots for Islamist Dictator Who Actually Jails Journalists Over President Trump

    8 Reasons John Brennan Is a Clear & Present Danger to National Security
    Did Communist Spy John Brennan Admit to Using ILLEGAL Reverse Targeting to Spy on the Trump Campaign in Interview With Rachel Maddow?

  8. ?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1000727115182964743&

  9. The nastiness of that last sentence shocked me. Evidently the hatred of Trump is so fevered it can burn through twenty years of cordiality and acquaintance. I wonder if Jonah would be so hostile to someone who shared his view of Trump’s character but thought Trump’s policies were racist and tyrannical.
    READ ….on below…

      • ~ 2ndDivisionVet ….^^^^^
        If a president does what is good for the country & its people, then he’s
        FIT to be in Office. By that measure, I can think of a lot who were unfit.

        ~ JudyinCanada
        I wouldn’t bother with these few #NeverTRUMPers that are LEFT….
        The #1 #NeverTRUMPer has already Joined the TRUMP train …
        Glenn Beck: ‘I’ll vote for Trump.’ …..ha’

        • ~ Icurious14u … so TRUE so TRUE!!! WTP want PEACE! YEP we DO

          Glenn….The Right isn’t Bad. Your seeing the true BAD in the Left. We all on the Right saw this and is why we went 4 Trump. It had Nothing to do With racism, white supremacy or Natzism….We hate those things as much as anyone but if we choose to want to Protect our borders or vent those coming into our country is only to protect OUR loved ones & it doesn’t matter if its Europeans or Muslims…if They mean us harm we don’t want them. …… GET IT ??? O’ what a WEB …. OBAMA STIRRED UP!!!

          • ~ Alphaguns ….mo’
            Glenn we need to unify to take back our country from those that wish to see it remade in a socialist marxist utopia. Trump is a man of action and didn’t dance around issues like politicians do which is why he had my vote from the start. It’s time to stop playing nice and start hitting back, we have to defend our nation and culture at all cost. You are a nice person Glenn as is Ted Cruz, but we don’t live in nice times. It’s going to be an uphill battle with the left and brutal, we must stand for our conservative values our country now more than ever. I appreciate you coming to the table, we need all the help we can get to take this country back.

            Glenn, as you said, these fake news outlets are not manned by first graders. They are educated. There has to be a reason why they are hammering Trump. Sure, they don’t want him to win in 2020, but why is it worth it to them to ruin their reputation with their own base? Maybe there is something else going on here. As the Wiki Leaks release of Podesta’s email proved, Podesta had no reason to doubt that all of these fake news organizations would attend a dinner so they and the HRC managers could strategize on how to defeat Trump, and now we’ve learned that the FBI, DOJ, CIA, HRC, and others were committing crimes. Maybe, just maybe, the fake news organizations were in on the criminal acts as well. If so, doesn’t it make sense that they would want to depose him as President? Imagine what will happen to these fake news organizations if Trump wins in 2020 and proceeds to drain the swamp, and it turns out the fake news organizations were part of it. OUCH!

            Trump just keeps winning winning and winning!

    • He’s spot on, hitting on all cylinders. I’ll NEVER read that Goldberg dude again. NEVER. He’s sacrificed any good will I had, giving him the benefit of the doubt that he was not a totally biased, sore loser. As for that Bret Stephens: How can any conservative, Republican, or person who’s paying attention actually wish that HILLARY the MOST CORRUPT were president? Had she been in the Oval Office, NO ONE would EVER have learned about how absolutely CORRUPT the DOJ/CIA/FBI are, at least at the top.

  10. Imagine any Republican having made the same joke about Barack Obama during his presidency. It would have been the top story in the media until he was driven from office, with incessant pestering of other Republicans to denounce the offender and impeach him. …below

    • That has got to be the most outrageous story of the year. And, of course, you do notice that it’s meant solely to degrade WOMEN. How can I say that? You do notice that there’s not an alternative name offered for the much-hated penis, as one would expect in the case of men who believe they’re women so want to disavow their inborn “equipment.” Why isn’t there a similar non-scientific euphemism offered for male anatomy, such as 21st appendage or maybe body finger? Some are saying it should be front post. But seriously. WHY is it only the female anatomy that has to be denied/renamed/disappeared? It’s just another case of misogyny masquerading as political correctness. Besides which, “front” hole? Don’t they know that, technically speaking, it’s the middle “hole?”

  11. So they find Manafort guilty of filing untrue tax returns, bank fraud, and I forgot what else. Anyway, 10 counts set aside as a mistrial; “guilty” on 8 counts. What’s next? Who knows? Sentencing to come, I suppose. The supposed BIG NEWS of the day is that the sleazy Cohen pleaded guilty to whatever the hell they charged him with but also guilty to campaign finance violations that he claimed (supposedly under oath, for what his word is worth) that a “presidential candidate” ordered him to do. This is supposedly the payments to Stormy and the other “woman” who were alleging to reveal they had flings with Trump. So the media and the DemoncRATS are going crazy, thinking they’ve got Trump now. Cohen’s lawyer says that if Cohen is guilty of violating campaign finance laws then Trump is, too. I think not, but hey. That probably won’t stop all his enemies, including those in his so-called own party, going after him and/or trying to impeach him or damage him otherwise. So many of them have a stake in NOT seeing the TRUTH come out or seeing the Swamp drained. Nevertheless:

    “Shortly before the 2016 election, one of President Trump’s lawyers, Michael Cohen, arranged a $130,000 payment to the porn star in return for silence about a 2006 affair she claimed to have had with Mr. Trump. (Both the president and Mr. Cohen have denied the affair; Mr. Trump has said he did not know of the payment to Ms. Daniels until this February.)

    Not satisfied with an old-fashioned sex scandal—perhaps because the president seems impervious to that—some want to turn this into a violation of campaign-finance law. Trevor Potter, a former member of the Federal Election Commission told “60 Minutes” the payment was “a $130,000 in-kind contribution by Cohen to the Trump campaign, which is about $126,500 above what he’s allowed to give.” The FBI raided Mr. Cohen’s office, home and hotel room Monday. They reportedly seized records related to the payment and are investigating possible violations of campaign-finance laws.

    But let’s remember a basic principle of such laws: Not everything that might benefit a candidate is a campaign expense.

    Campaign-finance law aims to prevent corruption. For this reason, the FEC has a longstanding ban on “personal use” of campaign funds. Such use would give campaign contributions a material value beyond helping to elect the candidate—the essence of a bribe.

    FEC regulations explain that the campaign cannot pay expenses that would exist “irrespective” of the campaign, even if it might help win election. At the same time, obligations that would not exist “but for” the campaign must be paid from campaign funds.

    If paying hush money is a campaign expense, a candidate would be required to make that payment with campaign funds. How ironic, given that using campaign funds as hush money was one of the articles of impeachment in the Watergate scandal, which gave rise to modern campaign-finance law.”

  12. Mollie Tibbetts. May she rest in peace and may her family find peace and justice. FOUND murdered by an ILLEGAL ALIEN.

    How much more of this can We the People take? I’m sure there will be the usual details to follow, such as how many times they let him go, how he got into the country, how often he evaded deportation, etc. But in any case, no matter the details, he did not belong in this country. HAD Obama enforced the law, Mollie would still be alive today.

  13. WOOT

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s